Alan Dershowitz, the long-time Harvard Professor and constitutional scholar who defended former President Trump during his first impeachment trial, published an opinion in the Wall Street Journal titled No, You Can't Impeach a Former President.  In this opinion, Dershowitz argues that Trump's upcoming Senate impeachment trial must be dismissed because the Senate no longer has jurisdiction to convict Trump since he is no longer the president. 

Today, House Democrats and lawyers for former President Trump filed their Trial Memorandum and Answer in the upcoming impeachment trial of former President Trump.  The legal arguments in these documents raise important issues, such as lack of jurisdiction and due process. 

On jurisdiction, former President Trump's lawyers argue in their response:

The Senate of the United States lacks jurisdiction over the 45th President because he holds no public office from which he can be removed rendering the Article of Impeachment moot and a non-justiciable question.

We've reached a point in our history where, to the mainstream media and liberals, the values of freedom and liberty, so fundamental to our nation, have become controversial and even "racist."  In honor of the 233rd anniversary of the signing of the Constitution today, both President Trump and Attorney General Bill Barr gave strong defenses of America's founding principles, which are enshrined in the Constitution.

On Sunday night, a new interview with Attorney General Bill Barr aired on Mark Levin's "Life, Liberty, and Levin." The interview covered an array of topics including recent public unrest and voting issues. Levin's interview comes only a few weeks after Attorney General Barr endured hours of unfettered questioning by House Democrats at a Judiciary hearing.

On Wednesday, former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn emerged victorious in the fight over whether to grant his writ of mandamus filed in the D.C. Circuit. This comes after U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan refused to dismiss Flynn’s case, despite the Department of Justice informing the court that it was no longer pursuing charges against him. Judge Sullivan appointed John Gleeson as amicus curiae to argue for his ability to decide whether the charges should be dropped. In an opinion authored by Judge Neomi Rao the D.C. Circuit admonished Judge Sullivan’s decision to appoint Gleeson and ordered the lower court to dismiss the charges against Flynn.

While Republican lawmakers continue to promote the rule of law in response to recent nationwide unrest, Democratic lawmakers in Seattle are taking the opposite approach. One week ago, a group of protestors seized 6 blocks of the area surround Seattle’s Capitol Hill and  established the Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone (CHAZ) or Capitol Hill Organized Protest (CHOP). Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkin has taken a hands off approach to the takeover, even going so far as abandoning the Seattle Police’s East Precinct against the wishes of Police Chief Carmen Best.

Apparently both the left and the right are outraged at aspects of Judge Sullivan's decision to delay granting the Department of Justice’s motion to drop the case against Michael Flynn.  But while one side respects the separation of powers and the rule of law, the other side is acting like a schoolyard bully making threats.

To our minds, Judge Sullivan blurs separation of powers when he appointed a retired judge who publicly expressed opinions against Flynn to review the case and accept amicus curiae briefs.  Judge Sullivan seems to be acting like a prosecutor, not an “umpire” judge.  While we consider Judge Sullivan’s decision extremely troubling, we think Flynn’s lawyers took the appropriate course of action in this case by requesting a writ of mandamus. 

General Michael Flynn's attorneys have requested a writ of mandamus from the D.C. Circuit ordering that the Department of Justice's unopposed motion to dismiss be granted.  While mandamus is an extraordinary writ, the district judge's actions in the past two weeks have also been extraordinary.  As Hans von Spakovsky explained:

Carrie Severino wrote today about liberals' attacks on the rule of law and Attorney General Bill Barr, all as part of their efforts to "resist" the presidency of Donald Trump:

What we have been witnessing is an all-out assault on the rule of law from the woke Left, which has elevated its political ideology to something resembling a secular religion. By this mentality, Trump and his agents are monomaniacally recast as totems of sinister forces who must be stopped at all costs. Never mind notions of fair process and democratic deliberation that made the American system of law what it is.

Today was likely one of the last “controversial” hearings for a judicial nominee for President Trump’s first term.  Judge Justin Walker was before the committee as a nominee to the DC Circuit.  However, much of the Democrats' potential fire was taken away before the hearing even started.  Yesterday, the American Bar Association (ABA), the self-proclaimed "gold standard" of Senate Democrats, rated Judge Walker "Well Qualified."  Judge Walker had previously been rated "not qualified" by the ABA, due to his being just short of the required number of post-law school years of experience.